About your Search

20130416
20130424
Search Results 0 to 2 of about 3
and stealth technology and ability to fight at supersonic speeds. it may be the way it has been able to avoid the budget cutters in washington. ha >> "washington journal," continues. host: we are talking about the roles of security cameras in asian oil security. welcome to the program. talk to us about your thoughts and feelings regarding the role of public and private cameras in national security and the impact of these cameras. seen what we have historically is that public cameras are not good at preventing crime. this has come up in the context of london and the united kingdom, which has some of the largest, most saturated cctv areas. the studies have shown that these cameras are not good for prevention purposes. the next question is are they good for solving crimes? what we have seen in london, which is one of the most saturated areas, is that the cameras are not good at solving crimes. a police steady in london shows that for every 1000 camera there was only one crime that was solved. you have a question of effectiveness. what we see is that they are not. we hear. they did not help to so
it's terrible with all the technology we have that they couldn't make a sweep of this area. they said they had bomb-sniffing dogs. job.nk it is an inside republicans can get over that nine of what happened on their watch. it will do anything to try to read it host: you are blaming this on the republican party? .aller: no i would imagine that some people in the republican party -- host: what evidence? caller: i do not have evidence but i have the evidence of previous things they did. they try to make benghazi into another 9/11. they will do anything in their power to make another 9/11 in president obama's watch. host: from the wall street journal this morning, this is what the report -- mitt am a little bit in the papers. times." "the new york writes this -- the is from mike mccall, chairman of homeland security. was quoted as saying -- also from the papers this morning, -- also from "usa today," more about the bomb -- clay in cape cod, massachusetts, go ahead -- concernedam quite about what happened, obviously. i have to tell you -- yesterday was patriots did. people forget that when
of the issues we have looked at and there are ways technology-wise to do checks. this legislation does not move in that direction. it is the opposite, prohibiting a national registry so that information about themselves are not made public and not controlled by government. they are controlled by the person who sells the gun, so therefore there is no record of gun ownership and that is specifically admitted under current law and the bills we are taking up today. the suggestion you are making is one we have had in the past. i do not think there is the legislative support to move that type of proposal, but i agree with you that it is worthy to take a look at. look at both sides had right now there is a missed trust of what government will do with that information. those answers need to be -- questions need to be answered. host: from twitter, the fact that it will not stop all people from getting guns is a weak excuse. let me put another issue on the table. you serve on the foreign affairs committee and this is the headline in the international section of "the new york times." government will do wi
Search Results 0 to 2 of about 3